Professional Services Council

The Professional Services Council (PSC) is a trade association describing itself as "the leading advocate and resource for the federal professional and technical services industry."[1] It has around 370 member corporations. PSC is a major opponent of the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Executive Order, an order issued by President Obama in 2014 that aims to ensure that federal contractors comply with federal wage laws, health and safety standards, and civil rights laws.[2]

In a 2015 statement to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, then-PSC President Stan Soloway claimed, "There is no evidence of a widespread problem of pervasive, repeated or willful violations of labor laws by federal contractors," and called the order "a de facto blacklisting of well-intentioned, ethical businesses."[3]

However, many of PSC's member companies and/or their subsidiaries have multiple serious violations of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) workplace safety standards that would be actionable under the EO.

Member Companies Cited for Serious OSHA Violations

An investigation by the Center for Media and Democracy of OSHA inspection records from January 1, 2013-December 1, 2015 found that numerous corporations (and/or their subsidiaries) whose executives sit on the PSC board had been cited for serious violations of OSHA standards. A "serious" violation indicates "a substantial probability that death or serious physical harm could result" from a hazard, a "willful" violation is cited when "evidence shows either an intentional violation of the Act or plain indifference to its requirements," and a "repeat" violation indicates the business "has been cited previously for a substantially similar condition."[4]

AECOM

AECOM and its subsidiary companies provide professional technical and management support services for public and private clients around the world, including agencies of the U.S. government.[5] In 2014, AECOM generated $1.25 billion in revenue from the federal government.[6]

Between 2013-2015 several of AECOM’s subsidiary companies and related entities, including AECOM Technical Services Inc.[7], URS Corporation[8] , URS Federal Technical Services[8][7], URS Energy & Construction[8][7], and the Cleveland Wrecking Company[9][8] received some 33 OSHA citations: 21 "Serious" and 12 "Other-than-Serious," and $115,115 in penalties, some of which remain under contest or are pending abatement or penalty payment.[10][11] These violations are described in detail below. This count does not include a tragic death resulting from safety violations in 2012, which would not be reportable under the Executive Order as it occurred outside the EO’s three-year look-back period.

AECOM

Exposure to Cadmium Hazard

In response to a complaint, OSHA conducted an investigation on March 5, 2013 at AECOM in Chambersburg, PA. OSHA originally issued 6 "Serious" citations and $30,000 in fines, which were reduced in a formal settlement to 5 "Other" violations and $20,000 in fines for violating multiple provisions of OSHA’s comprehensive standard to protect workers from exposure to cadmium,[12] a known cancer-causing substance.[13] These included failure to control exposures below the allowable limit; failure to prevent handling of contaminated uniforms; and failure to properly train workers about these dangers.[12]

AECOM Subsidiaries

Death in Marcus Hook, PA in 2015

49 year-old Jeffrey Shannon[14] died on March 30, 2015 at Sunoco Inc.'s Marcus Hook Industrial Complex in Pennsylvania, when a massive 1,200 foot pylon struck him. The facility was being converted from an oil refinery to a natural gas storage and processing plant. Shannon was employed by an AECOM subsidiary, AECOM Technical Services, Inc., which was a contractor at the site.[15]

OSHA issued citations[16] to AECOM Technical Services, Inc. for 2 "Serious" violations and proposed a $14,000 penalty, the maximum allowed. The company was cited for failing to suspend the pile driving operation when tops were being cut off of already driven pile,16 and inadequate safety training. As of January 2016, the company was contesting the violations.

Death in Bakersfield, CA in 2012, yet OSHA Violations Continue

The Bakersfield Californian reported that Luis Roberto Minjarez, 51, of Los Angeles died in 2012 after he fell from an elevated lift while working for AECOM's subsidiary, Cleveland Wrecking Company at Pacific Gas & Electric Co.'s abandoned Kern Power Plant.[17]

Cal-OSHA spokesman Peter Melton said Minjarez was torch cutting beams in a boiler room while he was lifted about 50 feet high in an aerial basket. "The beam collapsed and knocked over the basket that he was in and so the employee fell," Melton said. The OSHA investigation revealed that one day before the accident, the company:

...partially removed a section of the tank girder…[which] contributed to the instability of the tank. The tank wall section that was cut just prior to the accident was approximately 40 feet high and did not have any lateral support.[18]

The company received $20,250 in penalties and was cited for 4 "Other-than-Serious" violations and for 1 "Serious" violation of Cal-OSHA's standard 1735 M01 for allowing a wall section, more than one story in height to stand alone without lateral bracing, unless a civil engineer substantiated its capability to stand without lateral support.[19][20] The detailed OSHA accident summary is available here.[21]

While violations occurring in 2012 would not be reportable under the terms of the Executive Order, this incident is described to provide background and context for the subsequent reportable violations of this AECOM subsidiary.

Cleveland Wrecking Company has continued to garner violations in the years since the tragic death in Bakersfield in 2012:[22]

1/28/2014[23] A Cleveland Wrecking Company operation in San Diego, CA was cited by Cal-OSHA for 2 "Other-than-Serious" violations and fined $340. The company was fined for violating Cal- OSHA's standards which requires the employer to have a written plan to provide emergency medical services18 and to implement effective emergency response procedures.

04/24/2013[24] In response to a complaint investigation, Cleveland Wrecking Company's operation in Antioch, CA was fined $5,875 and given 3 citations by Cal-OSHA, including one "Serious" violation under Cal-OSHA's standard for failing to provide traffic control to protect workers when their worksite encroaches on public streets and highways. It was cited for 2 "Other-than-Serious" violations for failing to implement effective emergency procedures to respond to signs and symptoms of possible heat illness; and to contact emergency medical services and transport employees to a place where they can be reached by an emergency medical provider.

01/13/2015[25] Following a planned inspection at the site of another AECOM subsidiary, URS Federal Technical Services in Barstow, CA, the company was cited for $62,900 in penalties and 18 "Serious" and 1 "Other" violation of multiple OSHA standards. These included failure to provide access for workers to safety information about hazardous chemicals; multiple violations of protections from electrical hazards; failure to provide proper exit signs and to maintain portable fire extinguishers; dangerous flooring; and failure to properly guard dangerous industrial equipment. These violations are being contested.

SAIC (Science Applications International Corp.)

SAIC provides information technology services, primarily to federal agencies, including military branches, intelligence, and civilian agencies.[26] In the fiscal year ending January 30, 2015, 97 percent of SAIC's total revenues were generated from the federal government, amounting to $3.77 billion.[27] Its executive on the PSC Board of Directors is Senior Vice President Tom Eldridge.[28] As described below, between 2013-2015 SAIC or its subsidiary Beck Disaster Recovery Inc. were cited for 2 "Serious" OSHA violations and $10,000 in penalties.[29]

Fatal Drowning of SAIC Employee Working for U.S. Navy in Marine Mammal Training

On April 29, 2014, the San Diego Union Tribune reported, "A 29-year-old government contractor died Monday during a nighttime exercise with the U.S. Navy's marine mammal program in San Diego Bay." Coll Perske, an employee of Science Applications International Corp., was given CPR at the scene by paramedics and taken to UC San Diego Medical Center in Hillcrest, where he was pronounced dead. A Navy spokesman said the training exercise involved two boats and SAIC contractors. The team was practicing a skill called "swimmer interdiction," in which Navy dolphins and sea lions detect and mark an incoming swimmer with a claw-like device.[30]

On April 29, 2014, OSHA cited SAIC for 2 "Serious" violations and $10,000 in penalties. One citation was for exposing the trainer "to drowning hazards while swimming at night in areas containing underwater hazards including pier support pilings, where the employer failed to maintain contact with the deployed swimmer." SAIC was also cited for failing to provide a ring buoy and ladders.[31]

U.S. Department of Labor Demands Compensation for Overtime Violations, 2011

In 2011, SAIC subsidiary Beck Disaster Recovery Inc. agreed to pay more than $754,000 in overtime wages to 89 workers after an investigation by the U.S. Department of Labor found that the company "had incorrectly classified them as exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act, resulting in a denial of full and fair compensation for all hours worked."[32] According to DOL, Beck "provides emergency preparedness and natural disaster response services to public and private sector organizations nationwide."[33] DOL found that "the violations were systemic throughout the company's offices across the United States."[34] SAIC acquired Beck Disaster Recovery in 2009 and though it was later spun off in a corporate reorganization, it was a subsidiary at the time it agreed to pay the DOL fine.[35]

The case would not trigger specific action under the Executive Order, as it was settled more than three years ago. It is included to give an indication of the company's lax compliance with other important workplace laws.

BAE Systems

UK-based BAE Systems is one of the world's largest defense contractors. In 2014 it generated £3.66 billion ($5.78 billion) in revenue from the U.S. Department of Defense, one of its three largest clients.[36] DeEtte Gray, President of BAE's Intelligence and Security Sector, sits on PSC's Board of Directors.[28]

As described in detail below, between 2013-2015, BAE or its subsidiaries received 13 "Serious" and 8 "Other-than-Serious" OSHA citations and $103,345 in penalties.[37]

BAE Systems subsidiaries operate numerous shipyards, at least two of which have separately been cited for numerous OSHA violations over the last three years alone.

BAE Systems, Inc.

04/16/2013[38] Following an investigation in response to a complaint, OSHA cited BAE Systems, Inc at a manufacturing site in York, Pennsylvania for 2 "Serious" violations and penalties of $8,500 for violating provisions of OSHA's comprehensive standard to protect workers from exposure to cadmium, a known cancer-causing substance.[39] The violations including requirements for collecting and handling biological samples and for training workers. In an informal settlement, these were reduced to 1 "Serious" and 1 "Other-than-Serious" violation, though the penalties were sustained.

01/20/2015[40] OSHA cited BAE Systems, Inc. at the company's Norfolk Shipyard for 1 "Other-than- Serious" violation and an initial penalty of $5,000 for violating the standard for reporting to the government fatalities, hospitalizations, amputations, and losses of an eye as a result of work-related incidents. In an informal settlement the penalty reduced to $3,750. [See below for additional violations by a BAE subsidiary at the Norfolk shipyard.]

02/26/2015:[41] In a planned inspection at the Army Strategic Logistic Activity Center in Charleston, SC, BAE Systems, Inc. was initially cited for 1 "Serious" violation which was reduced in a formal settlement to 1 "Other-than-Serious" violation for failing to ensure that employees were adequately trained to render first aid. The initial fine of $2,295 was sustained. The case remains open.[42]

02/06/2014[43] Following a planned inspection at a BAE Systems, Inc. site in Cordova, AL, the company was fined $2,250 and cited for 1 "Serious" violation of the OSHA standard for the storage and protection of oxygen-fuel cylinders used in gas welding and cutting. In an informal settlement the violation was reduced to 1 "Other-than-Serious" and the penalty to $1,350.

BAE Systems Southeast Shipyard Alabama, Mobile, AL

This 432-acre site provides direct access to and from the Gulf of Mexico and major shipping lanes and offers dry-dock and heavy-lift capacity for the largest ships trading in and around the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico region, including those from commercial fleets, cruise ships and vessels that serve the U.S. defense cargo market.[44]

2013 Drowning Death

On April 3, 2013, 64-year-old John R. Johnson and another BAE Systems Southeast Shipyard Alabama, LLC employee at its Mobile, Alabama shipyard were thrown into the Mobile River after the pier they were standing on was hit by the Carnival Triumph cruise ship after it broke loose from its moorings.[45] One worker survived, but Johnson's body was found days later after a massive search.[46][47]

The National Transportation Safety Board investigated the incident, and in a Marine Accident Brief issued on January 23, 2014, concluded "...that the probable cause of the breakaway of the Carnival Triumph from its moorings and the subsequent collision with the dredge Wheeler and the towing vessel Noon Wednesday was the successive failure of multiple mooring bollards, which were known by BAE Systems to be in poor condition with an undetermined mooring load capability."[48]

Following a separate inspection, OSHA issued 1 serious violation and a $7,000 fine to BAE Systems Southeast Shipyard Alabama, LLC.[49] The company contested the citation, but the case closed in April, 2015 following a decision by an administrative law judge. According to OSHA, the company allowed vessel mooring bollards and hardware to break free from a pier under load. "The employer failed to conduct additional analysis of the Pier-K east and west bollards to determine if the mooring hardware were adequate to handle moored vessel loads and to conduct repairs of the mooring hardware prior to mooring vessels at Pier K of the facility exposing employees to struck- by, caught-in/by and drowning hazards."

Problems continued at BAE Systems Southeast Shipyard Alabama's Mobile site even after the 2013 death.

06/27/2014[50] After a planned inspection, BAE Systems Southeast Shipyard in Mobile Alabama was cited for 2 "Serious" and 1 "Other-than-Serious" violation, with a penalty of $6,100 for violating OSHA's general duty requirement, and for failing to provide protection from hazardous machines and dangerous floors.

"Located in a U.S. Navy mega-port and principal commercial area, the [shipyard's] primary customer is the U.S. Navy."[53]

06/12/2015[54] After an unprogrammed inspection, OSHA cited BAE Systems Norfolk Ship Repair for 1 "Serious" violation for failing to prevent workers from using a walkway while it was being used as a working surface and issued a $5,000 penalty. The case closed on October 22, 2015.

01/14/2013[55] Following a programmed inspection, BAE Systems Norfolk Ship Repair was cited for 1 "Serious" violation of the standard for arc welding and cutting for failing to ensure that all cables were properly insulated to protect workers against electrical current. In an informal settlement the initial penalty of $3,000 was reduced to $2,250.

Gender Discrimination Suit

On September 3, 2015 the Associated Press[56] reported that plaintiffs in a gender-discrimination lawsuit filed against BAE Systems Norfolk Ship Repair Inc. have asked a federal judge to give preliminary approval to a $3 million settlement. "A class-action lawsuit was filed in 2013 by women working at BAE Systems Norfolk Ship Repair Inc. The women say in the lawsuit that they suffered pay and promotion discrimination, were retaliated against, and experienced sexual harassment. BAE denies any wrongdoing, but the settlement is unopposed by the company."

This case would not trigger a reporting obligation under the Executive Order, as it was settled before there was a judgment or merits determination. It is included to give an indication of the company's compliance with other important workplace laws and because it occurred at a sensitive federal site whose main customer is the U.S. Navy.

BAE Systems Southeast Shipyard Jacksonville, FL

12/15/2014:[57] Following an inspection in response to a complaint, BAE Systems Southeast Shipyards Jacksonville was fined $4,250 and cited for one serious violation of the OSHA requirement that gangways be of adequate width and strength, maintained in safe repair, and safely secured.

BAE Systems Information and Electric Systems Integration, Nashua, NH

07/29/2014:[58] BAE Systems Information and Electric Systems Integration was initially cited for 3 "Serious" violations and an initial fine of $21,000 (the maximum penalty for each initial violation) involving important electrical hazards. In the subsequent settlement, the company was fined $7,000 and cited for 1 "Serious" violation for failing to ensure that only qualified persons may perform testing work on electric circuits or equipment.

Honeywell International Inc.

Honeywell and its subsidiary companies are involved in numerous industries, including manufacturing specialty chemicals and aerospace products. In 2014, Honeywell generated $3.69 billion in revenue from the federal government, primarily related to aerospace.[59] Honeywell executives sit on the board of PSC and the HR Policy Association.[60]

Between 2013-2015, Honeywell International Inc. or its subsidiaries or related entities incurred 18 “Serious” and 13 “Other-than-Serious” OSHA citations and $39,125 in penalties.[61]

Honeywell International Inc., 905 East Randolph, Hopewell, VA

On January 28 2015, a tank exploded at Honeywell International's Hopewell, Virginia plant after it became over-pressurized during cleaning.[62] The Hopewell facility "is one of the world’s largest single-site producers of caprolactam, the primary feedstock in the production of nylon polymer used in carpet fibers, plastics and films," and "also produces a wide range of chemical intermediates," including sulfuric acid, specialty oximes, ammonia and carbon dioxide, as well as ammonium sulfate fertilizers.[63]

Luckily nobody was injured in the explosion, but the incident comes as little surprise at a plant that had been cited in 2013 for serious OSHA violations, and was responsible for numerous chemical leaks between 2013 and 2015 resulting in $300,000 in fines from the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality for spills of chemicals including “nitric acid, methyl ethyl ketone, caprolactam, oil and gasoline.”[64] Honeywell agreed to make $13 million in repairs to the plant. “DEQ has issued 14 enforcement orders to (the Hopewell plant) since 1990,” the Virginia agency said in a news release. “In addition, a joint consent decree by DEQ and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was issued to Honeywell in 2013 for air quality violations.”[65] These environmental problems do not trigger action under the Executive Order, but they are included to demonstrate that companies that run afoul of workplace health and safety regulations also often have problems with other regulations that protect the public.

02/02/2015: Days after the January 2015 explosion described above, OSHA inspected the Hopewell site and issued an initial fine of $3,675 for 1 “Serious” violation of Virginia’s General Duty requirement.[66]

03/09/2015: A month later, OSHA returned for a planned inspection of the facility and cited Honeywell for 3 additional serious violations and issued fines of $8,330. The company failed to train workers or to develop and implement safe work practices related to process safety management of highly hazardous chemicals; or to provide protection for workers using electrical equipment. The fines were later reduced to $6,545 in an informal settlement.[67]

03/14/2013: Less than two years before the explosion, OSHA conducted an inspection at Hopewell, and issued 6 “Serious” violations and fines of $9,540. When the case was closed in May, 2014 Honeywell was fined $3,780 and cited for 3 serious violations related to process safety management of highly hazardous chemicals, problems similar to those that would be found by OSHA in the aftermath of the 2015 explosion. Unfortunately, the Hopewell plant is not the only troubled Honeywell site: several other facilities have similarly been cited multiple times by OSHA for serious violations over that same time period.[68]

Honeywell’s Chesterfield facility "is one of the largest U.S. producers of nylon 6 resin, used in the production of carpet fiber, molded parts for automobiles, cord for fish nets, and plastic that is found in food packaging and pharmaceutical applications."[69]

09/08/2014: In response to a complaint, an OSHA inspection resulted in initial penalties of $8,300 for 3 “Serious” and 4 “Other-than-Serious” violations of OSHA for failing protect workers who are servicing or maintaining machines and equipment from hazardous energy; failure to ensure employees had an exit route door which could be opened from the inside at all times without keys, tools, or special knowledge; and failure to provide certain protections for workers using electrical equipment. The violations are under contest.[70]

09/08/2014: In response to a complaint, an OSHA inspection resulted in initial fines of $4,165 for 1 “Serious” and 3 “Other-than-Serious” violations. In a settlement, these were reduced to 3 “Other- than-Serious” violations and a fine of $3,332 for violations that included failure to perform proper exposure monitoring for employees, where Methylene Chloride, which OSHA considers a potential occupational carcinogen, is present.[71]

05/22/2013: In response to a complaint, an OSHA inspection resulted in initial fines of $3,570 for 2 “Serious” violations. In an informal settlement, these were reduced to 2 “Other-than-Serious” violations and fines of $1,700 for violations of the lockout/tagout standard.[72]

Honeywell International, Golden Valley, MN

"Honeywell’s Golden Valley facility is the global headquarters of Honeywell’s Automation and Control Solutions (ACS) division and three of its seven strategic business units."[73]

05/01/2014: In response to a complaint, an OSHA inspection resulted in a fine of $1,750 for 1 “Serious” violation for failing to protect the fingers of workers using welding machines.[74]

09/24/2013: In a planned inspection, Honeywell was cited for 4 serious violations and fined $5,600 for violations of several OSHA standards including: failure to provide protections for in-plant handling, storage, and utilization of all compressed gases; failure to provide proper guards for machine gears;74 and failure to provide protections when using electrical equipment.[75]

07/30/2014: Following a planned inspection at another Honeywell International site in Golden Valley, MN, OSHA issued a $1,750 penalty and 1 serious violation for failing to protect workers against exposure to electrical wiring and components.[76]

Honeywell Aerospace, 1985 Douglas Dr N., Golden Valley, MN 55427

09/25/2013: After a planned inspection, Honeywell subsidiary, Honeywell Aerospace was cited for 1 “Serious” and 1 “Other-than-Serious” violation and fined $1,400. The serious violation concerned the OSHA standard for hand and portable powered tools and equipment. An informal settlement sustained the violations and reduced the penalty to $980.[77]

Violations at Other Facilities

04/15/2015: After a referral inspection at a Chickasaw, AL site of UOP LLC, a Honeywell subsidiary, OSHA issued 1 “Serious” violation and a penalty of $2,168 for failing to maintain floors in a clean and dry condition.[78]

In 2012, OSHA cited Honeywell Electronic Chemicals, LLC for jeopardizing the safety of employees at its Mansfield, Texas, and issued 10 “Serious” violations with $53,000 proposed penalties. Employees were found to be exposed to catastrophic releases of highly hazardous chemicals while conducting operations at the plant,” reads the OSHA Press release. “This company jeopardized the safety of its employees by failing to implement OSHA's process safety management regulations effectively,” said Jack Rector, OSHA's area director in Fort Worth, Texas. “OSHA requires employers to provide safe and healthful working conditions to prevent accidents and illnesses.”[79] The case closed in August, 2013 after a formal settlement sustained 5 “Serious” and 2 “Other-than-Serious” violations and a penalty of $23,300. The serious violations concerned process safety management of highly hazardous chemicals, and failure to post warning signs of the danger posed by permit-required confined spaces.[80]

In 2011, OSHA cited Honeywell International’s operations in Metropolis, Illinois for safety violations following a vapor release. “The U.S. Department of Labor's Occupational Safety and Health Administration has cited Honeywell International Inc. with 17 serious safety violations for process safety management violations after its Metropolis processing plant experienced a release of hydrogen fluoride vapor. Proposed penalties total $119,000.”[81] The case was closed in March, 2013 after a formal settlement in which the company was cited for 12 ”Serious” and 1 ”Other-than-Serious” violation, and a penalty of $70,000.[82]

Both of the preceding cases could trigger action under the EO as they reached a final resolution within the three-year look-back period.

Additional Complaints

Honeywell International has been trying for years to settle tens of thousands of asbestos exposure cases, and, in its 2015 SEC filings (see Note 19) the company estimated that at the end of 2014 it was liable for $1.5 billion in asbestos-related claims. These private lawsuits would not trigger action under the EO but are mentioned here to provide additional context.[59]

Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC)

CSC provides IT services, including cloud storage and security, for public and private sector clients. In 2015, CSC generated 31 percent of its total revenue from the U.S. federal government, amounting to $3.77 billion.[83] CSC merged with SRA late in 2015; it is sometimes referred to as CSRA.

As described in more detail below, between 2013-2015, CSC had 3 "Serious" and 4 "Other-than-Serious" citations from OSHA and penalties of $8,440.

05/08/2014:[84] At a site in Hanover, MD, Computer Sciences Corporation was cited for 1 "Serious" and 4 "Other-than-Serious" violations and fined $2,040 after an investigation following an accident involving the control of hazardous energy, known as the "lockout/tagout" standard. The company failed to provide protective materials and hardware that would isolate, secure or block machines or equipment from energy sources.

05/28/2014:[85] Subsequent to the accident investigation at the same site, the company was cited for an additional "Serious" violation and fined $1,500 for violation of the "General Duty" requirement.[86]

The following cases would not trigger specific action under the Executive Order as they occurred outside its three-year look-back period. They are included here because the standards violated are closely related to those involved in the more recent cases, and to give an indication of the company's overall record of compliance with the laws covered by the order.

03/12/2012:[87] and 3/22/2012[88] In response to a complaint at a site in Fayetteville, NC, Computer Sciences Corporation was fined $10,500 after being cited for 3 "Serious" and 4 "Other-than- Serious" violations related to asbestos exposure, including failure to train employees to use personal protective equipment; to maintain, inspect, or test protective equipment; and to develop, implement, or maintain a written hazard communication program. Ten days later, in response to a complaint, the company received another "Serious" violation and was eventually fined $5,600 for failure to provide training for employees who face a risk of electric shock.

04/06/2011:[89] In response to a complaint at Nellis Air Force Base in Las Vegas, Computer Sciences Corporation was cited for 2 "Serious" violations and fined $6,300 for failing to protect workers against occupational exposures to hexavalent chromium, a cancer-causing substance.[90]

Whistleblower Violation and Related Safety and Health Investigation

12/11/2014:[91] OSHA ordered Computer Sciences Corp. to pay $186,000 to two employees whom the company improperly laid off for raising nuclear safety concerns about the Hanford nuclear facility, in violation of federal whistleblower laws. The employees reported a defective electronic medical records system that had problems tracking medical restrictions. Consequently, workers medically restricted from certain jobs or areas with beryllium could be exposed. Beryllium, a metal once used at the facility, is a cancer-causing substance.[92]

9/21/2015:[93] Subsequent to this finding, on September 21, 2015, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Enterprise Assessments' Office of Enforcement notified Computer Sciences Corporation of its intent to conduct a worker safety and health investigation into the safety concerns that were expressed by the two former employees regarding an electronic medical record system that was being implemented by CSC at DOE's Hanford site. The DOE Office of Enforcement also notified CSC that it is considering taking enforcement action for substantiated retaliation against those two former CSC workers for raising the safety concerns.

Neither of these cases would trigger specific action under the Executive Order, as they relate to workplace laws not covered by the Order. They are included to give an indication of the company's compliance with other important workplace laws and because they occurred on a sensitive federal contract with the Department of Energy.

L-3 Communications (L-3)

L-3 Communications is an aerospace systems and national security contractor. In 2014, L-3 generated 71 percent of its total revenue from the federal government, amounting to $8.58 billion.[94]

As described in more detail below, between 2013-2015, L-3 or its subsidiary or related entity, L-3 Display Systems, received citations for 5 OSHA violations and $17,550 in fines.

3/10/14:[95] In response to a complaint at Fort Drum, NY, L-3 Communications was cited for 1 "Serious" violation and 2 "Other-than-Serious" violations, and fined $7,000. The serious violation concerned the failure to protect workers from exposure to hexavalent chromium, a cancer-causing substance.[96] The case remains open, pending abatement of violations and penalty payment.

4/17/14:[97] Following an unprogrammed inspection at an L-3 Communications site in Greenville, TX, OSHA inspectors cited the company for 1 "Serious" violation for failing to protect workers against exposure to electric shock. In an informal settlement the serious violation was reduced to "Other- than-Serious" and the penalty to $3,500.

6/02/14:[98] Following a referral inspection, OSHA cited an L-3 Communications site in Salt Lake City, UT for 1 "Serious" violation, and issued a fine of $4,500.

11/20/14:[99] Following a complaint inspection, OSHA cited an L-3 subsidiary or related entity, L-3 Display Systems, in Alpharetta, GA for 2 "Serious" violations of the standard for personal protective equipment, and issued an initial penalty of $5,100. In an informal settlement, the violation was reduced to 1 "Other-than-Serious" and the penalty to $2,550.

Federal Lobbying

Opposition to Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Executive Order

In its fight against President Obama’s Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Executive Order (EO 13673), PSC executives have testified before Congress,[3] sent multiple letters to the administration,[100][101] and conducted extensive media outreach.[102][103] In 2015, PSC and industry groups signed a letter asking that the rulemaking be halted.[104]